Has Jerry Falwell Jr. Embraced His Inner Dispensationalist Cult-Member?

Perhaps you have already heard about the latest brouhaha generated by Jerry Falwell Jr.’s interview with the Washington Post.  Aside from the

Jerry Falwell Jr.

political hypocrisy strewn throughout the entire piece, two points, in particular, have gained significant public attention.

If you have been following this controversy, you may want to skip down and begin reading at part two of this post.  Otherwise, beginning with part one will catch you up on the issues involved.

Part. One:

First, when asked, “Is there anything President Trump could do that would endanger that support from you or other evangelical leaders?”  Falwell flatly answered, “No.”

Falwell’s response unveils his cult-follower mentality when it comes to all things Trump.  Ruth Graham at Slate Magazine explains the ridiculous, idolatrous illogic of Falwell’s answer:

“His explanation was a textbook piece of circular reasoning: Trump wants what’s best for the country, therefore anything he does is good for the country. There’s

Ruth Graham, journalist

something almost sad about seeing this kind of idolatry articulated so clearly. In a kind of backhanded insult to his supporters, Trump himself once said that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” without losing his base. It’s rare to see a prominent supporter essentially admit that this was true.”

I will go one step further and suggest that not even Jesus Christ himself demands such blind, a-moral loyalty.  At least, the apostle Paul admitted that he stopped short of offering that brand of devil-may-care devotion to Jesus Christ himself!

In 1 Corinthians 15:12-19, Paul seems to suggest that there is at least one thing the man from Nazareth could have done that would have caused Paul not to believe in him.

Jesus could have stayed dead.

For Paul insists:

“…if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.   For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either.   And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile…”

Not even the Lord and Savior of the universe demands the type of undiscerning, a-moral devotion that Falwell has placed in Donald Trump.

Folks, Falwell expresses a truly idolatrous brand of politics.

Yes, I realize that sorting out this issue requires a conversation about the relationship between faith and historical evidence, but we don’t have time for that discussion here.  I suggestion that you take a look at my book, Encountering Jesus, Encountering Scripture and then follow up on its bibliography.

The second point of controversy was Falwell’s defense of his position by referring to his “two kingdoms” theology.  He explained:

“There’s two kingdoms. There’s the earthly kingdom and the heavenly kingdom. In the heavenly kingdom the responsibility is to treat others as you’d like to be treated. In the earthly kingdom, the responsibility is to choose leaders who will do what’s best for your country.”

I won’t bother to address the problems created by Falwell’s two kingdoms theology – though I have serious doubts about Falwell’s ability to express an informed opinion on Lutheran theology — since I have critiqued Luther’s own application of his two kingdoms theology, its dangerous uses in 20th century history, and explained what I understand to be the New Testament’s teaching about God’s kingdom in my book, I Pledge Allegiance.

Part Two:

So…this brings me to the thoughts motivating me to add something further to the conversation surrounding Falwell’s interview.  Others, like Professor John Fea (here and here), have covered the issues well, but I suspect there may be another suggestion yet to be explored:  the possible influence of dispensational theology in the age of Trump.  If this term is new to you, start with this Wikipedia page and Google on from there.

Not long ago I came across a separate interview with Jerry Falwell Jr. where he said that he “did not look to Jesus” for guidance in his politics, but was directed instead by his concerns for “a law and order candidate.”  (Unfortunately, I have not been able to relocate the source for that interview.  Any help out there???).

Here are the two interesting puzzle pieces that got me thinking.

 One, Jesus’ life and teaching, items such as Jesus’ own pacifism, the Sermon on the Mount and the rest of our Lord’s ethical instruction, have no role in forming Falwell’s view of Christian politics.

 Two, he believes that Christian values in this “earthly kingdom” are separate and distinct from God’s values in the heavenly kingdom.

Well, it just so happens that those two positions were (are?) identifying characteristics of the earliest, die-hard advocates of American dispensational theology — a stream in which I suspect Liberty University is squarely planted.  Though I can’t cite a scientific poll to prove it, I am reasonably certain that dispensationalism (in one or another of its various forms) is the most commonly embraced “theology” in North America, especially among those who are theologically unaware.

American dispensationalism is the fuel that feeds the raging fire of U.S. Christian Zionism.  That alone is enough to make it highly suspect, as far as I am concerned.  It is also one of the several reasons I abandoned my youthful dispensationalism long ago.

Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952), the founding president of Dallas Theological Seminary, which remains the Mecca of dispensational thinking to this day, was the first American systematician of dispensational thought.  His 8-volume work of Systematic Theology, first printed in 1947, remains in print today.  (My father gave me a complete set as a college graduation present.  Yes, I was, and probably still am, a nerd).

An important feature of Chafer’s dispensationalism was his emphasis on the postponement of Jesus’ ethics.  He taught that when Jesus said the kinds of “irrational” things we find in the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere, he was speaking solely to the Jewish people who were supposed to receive him as their messiah.

But since the majority of Jesus’ contemporaries rejected his messiahship, the implementation of that ethical teaching was deferred, postponed until the future arrival of the “millennial kingdom” when all of Israel will finally recognized Jesus as the One they have been awaiting.  (For more detail, check out this page published by someone called The GospelPedlar.  It has a good summary with citations explaining Chafer’s theology of “Postponed Ethics.”

So, for old-time dispensationalists like Chafer and his modern devotees, Jerry Falwell Jr. is reflecting sound dispensational, theological conviction when he ignores Jesus’ ethics while deciding his politics.  For this frame of mind, the church does not now inhabit the proper kingdom age for the application of Jesus’ teaching to the Christian life, certainly not to a Christian’s politics.

This earthly kingdom is not the correct kingdom for Jesus’ ethics to be seriously applied, across the board, to all of Christian living.  Although Chafer’s dispensationalism has nothing to do with Martin Luther’s two kingdoms theology, we can see an important convergence of ideas at this point.

Arriving at the same place by different routes, both groups (Lutherans and dispensationalists) endorse the idea of different kingdoms in different spheres with different behavioral expectations for God’s people.

I admit that I have not called Jerry Falwell Jr. and asked him whether his political thinking has been self-consciously shaped by Chaferian dispensationalism.  After all, he is a lawyer with a B.A. in religious studies from, you guessed it, Liberty University.  Are my prejudices showing?

Maybe I should give him a call someday, but he probably wouldn’t talk to me. (See his refusal to talk with people like Shane Clairbone here, here, here and here.)

What I DO know is that ideas matter.  They matter a great deal.  Theological ideas matter supremely to God’s church.  (Any believer who is anti-theology doesn’t understand what he/she is saying.)  We don’t have to know their source or history.  We don’t even have to be able to articulate them clearly, much less expound upon their ramifications, whether intellectual or behavioral.

We simple breath in the lingering aroma of influential ideas, assimilating

Liberty University

them unwittingly from our (church) environment.  And the American church offers an environment seeped in the aroma of old-time dispensationalism.

As I continue to ponder the damning conundrum of America’s conservative/ evangelical/fundamentalist  church offering up its overwhelming support to Donald Trump, I can’t help but wonder if this is another part of the dispensational legacy fallen like poisoned fruit from the American tree of unbiblical theology.

Chris Hedges Challenges Us to Put Faith Into Practice

Truthdig – an online magazine that I read regularly – has published an excellent essay by Chris Hedges describing the anti-war protests of Phil and Dan Berrigan during the 1960’s movement against the war in Vietnam.  It is entitled “Resistance is the Supreme Act of Faith.”

I became a follower of Mr. Hedges’ work years ago when I read his excellent book, War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, reflecting on his many years as a war correspondent.  It’s a book that I believe every American should read.

I have copied selected excerpts from the Truthdig article below.  You can find the entire piece by clicking on the title above.

“The struggle against the monstrous radical evil that dominates our lives—an evil that is swiftly despoiling the earth and driving the human species toward extinction, stripping us of our most basic civil liberties and freedoms, waging endless war and solidifying the obscene wealth of an oligarchic elite at our

Catholic priests, Phil and Dan Berrigan, leading an anti-Vietnam, anti-draft demonstration

expense—will be fought only with the belief that resistance, however futile, insignificant and even self-defeating it may appear, can set in motion moral and spiritual forces that radiate outward to inspire others, including those who come after us. It is, in essence, an act of faith. Nothing less than this faith will sustain us. We resist not because we will succeed, but because it is right. Resistance is the supreme act of faith.”

…….

 “The Berrigans, who identified as religious radicals, had little use for liberals. Liberals, they said, addressed only small, moral fragments and used their pet causes, in most cases, not to bring about systemic change, but for self-adulation. Liberals often saw wars or social injustices as isolated evils whose end would restore harmony.”

…….

 “The Berrigans excoriated the church hierarchy for sacralizing the nation, the government, capitalism, the military and the war. They argued that the fusion of secular and religious authority would kill the church as a religious institution. The archbishop of New York at the time, Cardinal Francis J. Spellman, in one example, sprinkled holy water on B-52 bombers and blessed the warplanes before their missions in Vietnam. He described the conflict as a ‘war for civilization’ and ‘Christ’s war against the Vietcong and the people of North Vietnam.’  Phil Berrigan, the first priest to go to jail for protesting the war, celebrated Mass for his fellow prisoners. The services were, for the first time, well attended.”

 I, personally, wish that churchmen like the Berrigan brothers would include a more forthright, verbal witness to Jesus Christ and the kingdom of God in their lifestyle of public resistance.

On the other hand, they at least are/were doing the work that precious few evangelicals bother to think about.

I wish that religious activists like Chris Hedges, a former Harvard divinity student, could understand that the foundation stone of spiritual death in this world is not found in temporal systems of repression, whether social, political or economic, but are rooted in the all-pervasive nature of humanity’s sinfulness.

On the other hand, he at least publicly identifies and  condemns the many evils that most evangelicals bless and embrace.

The kingdom of God on earth will never erupt from within.  It is a foreign entity, a rule from witsout, that only arrives with the resurrected Jesus.  I believe that this fact is the beginning of our only hope in life as well as in death.

But I also wish that more men and women who understand the gospel of Jesus Christ would also understand the essential, moral, spiritual continuity that ties Christian self-denial to our faithful resistance against all forms of evil, whether that evil shows itself in militarism, warfare, capitalism, nationalism, inequality, civil religion, racism, or injustice.

The church’s failure to make  this connection consistently, to think and to behave with coherence across all these areas of life, cripple our witness, stunt our spiritual development, and abandon a needy world to the merchants of half-measures.

I encourage you to read Mr. Hedges’ weighty words and think about his lessons through the lens of Jesus’ own ethics.  Perhaps, my book I Pledge Allegiance can help, if this is a new exercise for you.

Politics as Witness

The Christian blogosphere, Patheos, has published a guest opinion piece by Daniel Darling and Dean Inserra entitled “What Is Politics Doing to Our Witness?”.  I have copied the two, closing paragraphs below.  You can read the entire piece here.

“While the fracturing of friendships over politics is unnecessarily sad, even more tragic is the experience of those outside the church who may engage in a conversation about the gospel, because they have seen the church in action on their social media timeline and have decided that this is a gospel not worth investigating. Have we gained the world and lost our souls?

“As we steward our earthly citizenship, let us always be pointing, by the words we say and the way we say them, to a citizenship in a city whose builder and maker is God. Let’s not gain a political world and lose our missional soul.”

The authors thankfully remind their readers that a disciple’s citizenship in the kingdom of God takes priority over all other allegiances.  I admit that I am biased here, because this is the core of my message in my new book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America.

Unfortunately – at least in my view – that is where the similarity between these two authors’ and myself ends.  For, while they rightly lament the unseemly levels of hostility and slander that often characterize Christian political discourse nowadays, a concern for personal deportment marks the beginning as well as the end of their concern.  Apparently, politics’ main threat to Christian “witness” is its power to fuel hostility within God’s family.

The glaring hole in this argument, however (and, again, I am not dismissing the importance of this solitary observation), appears in the authors’ failure to connect (a) the specific policies enacted by our politics to (b) the ethical norms demanded of us by citizenship in God’s kingdom.

The Patheos article leaves both the real-world consequences of our political choices and the personal demands of kingdom citizenship unaddressed, unspecified.  Both “the kingdom” and “politics” remain blank cyphers waiting to be filled in by the individual in whatever way they think best.  Of most importance is ensuring that our conversations on these subjects is always winsome.

Apparently, winsomeness is the key to winning people to the gospel.

But if the kingdom comes first, shouldn’t the kingdom be determining the shape of my politics, going above and beyond the shape of my demeanor when talking about my vote?

Is it ok to vote for genocide as long as I debate the decision with kindness?  I am sure these two authors would say “no” to that question.  But on what basis?

Here is my question:  What if my political decisions are rooted in fear and hostility?  Is that acceptable, as long as I talk about my xenophobic, fear-based political life in a calm, friendly, winsome tone of voice?

If the kingdom of God really does come first in my life, shouldn’t the Father’s kingdom ethics, as taught by Jesus, exercise control over my political actions – actions that go well beyond the way I talk with others about my choices?

Isn’t the content of my politics as (if not more) important to “my Christian witness” than my personal deportment?

That, my friends, is the crucial existential break that has set American evangelicalism and the Religious Right adrift, lost in its own sea of moral relativism.  The compartmentalization of a contentless kingdom, discreetly isolated from our idiosyncratic political choices, has left America with an individualistic church fueling a heartless, destructive politics, all in the name of Jesus.

Discover Why Pro-Israel/Zionist Groups Fought to Stop You from Seeing This Documentary

President Trump speaking at the annual AIPAC convention in Washington, D.C.

I recently watched the four-part documentary about the pro-Israel lobby in this country called (of all things!) “The Lobby.”

Produced by Aljazeera, “The Lobby” goes undercover to explore the inner workings of pro-Zionist lobbying organizations such as AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and The Israel Project in the United States.

The Electronic Intifada logo

I encourage you to watch this eye-opening – actually, jaw-dropping – investigative report here at The Electronic Intifada.

The Israel lobby worked very hard to suppress this film and ensure that it would never appear on Western television.  For a time, they had succeeded.  You can read a bit of that story on the film’s webpage.  Once you watch this fine example of investigative journalism, you will understand why the Israel lobby was so determined to keep it buried forever.

How would you respond to learning that a foreign government was spying of you?  Yes, spying on you, personally.

Among other disturbing facts detailed in “The Lobby”, is the story of how the Israel lobby hires domestic spies to monitor the political activities of American citizens, including your use of social media, your voting record, political contributions and activism.  They note anything that appears to be anti-Zionist, anti-Israel and then send that information to the Israeli government.

At the heart of the Israel lobby’s propaganda strategy is the deliberate confusion of ant-Zionism with anti-Semitism.  Consequently, pro-justice,

BDS the New Antisemitism

pro-Palestinian, anti-apartheid activism is tarred with the scurrilous brush of anti-Semitism.  An utterly nonsensical confusion.  But, sadly, it often works.

If the powers-that-be feel you are sufficiently “threatening” to their pro-Zionist message in America, you may be targeted; victimized by a smear campaign, character assassination or any number of dirty tricks the pro-Israel lobby keeps in its propaganda arsenal.

University students, professors and even regular folks involved in the BDS movement are typical targets for the Israel lobby’s dirty tricks.

“The Lobby” highlights the personal stories of several activists who have suffered the hurtful consequences of these attacks.

If any other nation on earth were spying and attacking American citizens as extensively and as habitually as Israel, it would be front page news, complete with public denunciations and televised Senate hearings up the wazoo.

You will also learn about the political manipulation, money laundering, illegal campaign contributions, as well as AIPAC’s influence on U.S. foreign policy, all financed by one or another of the tentacles comprising the Israel lobby in this country.

The film is long.  Each of the four episodes is about 50 minutes.  But it is well worth your time.

Meanwhile, Over at the Babylon Bee…Missionaries for Trump

Missions Trip Successfully Converts Entire Village Into Republicans

“UNDISCLOSED—A missions trip to a remote tribe in an undisclosed closed country has successfully converted the entire village into conservative Republicans, sources from the missions team confirmed Friday.
 
“After contextualizing the basics of right-wing beliefs to the culture of the tribe for several months, the missionaries finally made a breakthrough as they communicated to the group their need for conservative political philosophy to save them from their sins. Finally, missionaries gave a moving altar call Thursday evening, and the village elders responded in faith, accepting Republicanism as Lord of their life.

“The rest of the village soon followed.

“’When the people saw the glory of our savior Donald Trump, they erupted into spontaneous celebration,’ one of the American missionaries said in an emotional video uploaded to Facebook. ‘It was so great to see these people finally abandon their un-American culture and embrace the gospel of the United States, forever changing their eternity.’

“At publishing time, missionaries had confirmed there was still much work to do, such as converting the village into middle-class white people.”

If you are not familiar with “The Babylon Bee” check it out here.

Not only is this funny, it is all too true.

Years ago I was investigating the claim that missionaries with Wycliffe Bible Translators had worked with/for the CIA.  I discovered that it was true.

As I rummaged around old Wycliffe literature, I also discovered a lesson-planning book from the 1960s describing scenarios to be translated into native languages, once the alphabet had been created, and then used to teach students how to read their language.

One lesson went like this, complete with cartoon characters in frame after frame:

Traditionally, an Indian went fishing.

Caught a fish.

Took it back to the village in order to share the catch with everyone.

This is bad.

Instead, when you go fishing.

And you catch a fish.

Bring it back to the village and sell it for money.

Then you have money to buy new things.

And your neighbors learn that they must work to earn more money for themselves.

I kid you not.  Think about this…

When the U.S. Ruins a Country, It’s Survivors Have a Right to Asylum

President Trump and his base are in an uproar over the so-called caravan of Latin American refugees applying for asylum at our southern border, despite the fact that this is  perfectly legal.

These poor people are asking to apply for legal asylum — something allowed by U.S. law.  Yet, we see them gassed and shot at by U.S. border “security.”

Personally, I think that there needs to be a new question added to all asylum petitions:  “Are you fleeing a country where the U.S. government has sponsored a coup, overthrown a leader, meddled in elections, trained death squads, supported a dictator, imposed economic sanctions or manipulated the economy?”

Chris Hedges

Anyone who can check that box — which is anyone and everyone fleeing any country south of the U.S./Mexico border — deserves automatic asylum in this country.

If you are curious as to how U.S. foreign policy helped to create the current migrant “crisis,” watch Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges interview Professor Dana Frank here.  She details just some of the ways in which the 2009 overthrow of Honduras’ democratically elected

Professor Dana Frank

government, perpetrated by the Obama administration with Hillary Clinton as its premier cheerleader, led to the catastrophe that has now engulfed Honduras.

America owes not only asylum, but reparations and continuing support, to every man, woman and child now hoping to find a new life north of the border.

Should a Foreign Government Have the Power to Censor Your Political Actions?

The BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) movement is an international campaign that “works to end international support for Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law.”  You can learn more about it here.

I have participated in BDS campaigns for a long time.  It was begun by several Palestinian leaders and modeled after earlier, international BDS campaigns that successfully targeted South African apartheid.

History tells us that BDS can work to bring important social and political transformation.  And it is working, slowly but surely, to shed light on Israel’s dehumanization of Palestinians.

Here are two important points concerning BDS in the US:

First, did you know that 26 states have passed anti-BDS laws (and who knows how many local municipalities) making it illegal to do business with anyone involved in BDS activity?  Similar legislation is pending in another 13 states.

BDS activism is also a new excuse for Israel to blacklist visitors, barring them from entering the country.

Most recently a speech pathologist in Texas lost her job for refusing to sign a new contract demanding that she forswear any BDS activity.  As a Muslim American, she refused and was terminated. (Learn more about her story here and here).

Listen to her story below:

Second, several members of the House of Representatives and the Senate are trying to sneak a last minute provision called the Combating BDS Act  into an upcoming appropriations bill.  This act would criminalize any activity that lobbied state or local governments to divest from Israeli-based products or goods.

The bill is being opposed by several Jewish organizations (here and here) as well as the ACLU (which is a great organization, despite the objections of the Religious Right) as well as Senators Bernie Sanders and Diane Feinstein.

This bill is unconstitutional.  And American Christianity is supposed to like the Constitution, right?

Please call your congressional representatives and tell them, whether or not you agree with the BDS movement, that it is just plain wrong for a foreign government, in this case Israel, to pay off U.S. lawmakers so as to limit our rights to free speech, freedom of association, and the freedom to lobby our own elected officials in any way we wish.

What would you think if you heard that China or Russia were funding such a campaign in Congress?

What Does a ‘Christian Vote’ Look Like?

Dr. Suzanne McDonald is a theology professor at Western Theological Seminary in Holland, MI.  She is also a dear friend and former colleague.

She recently wrote an editorial for the Holland Sentinal newspaper entitledMy Take: What Does It Mean to be ‘Too Christian’?”  Her thoughts were sparked by a candidate’s remark that he might be “too Christian” for some people to vote for him.

She offers excellent counsel on what it means to cast a “Christian” vote.

I have included an excerpt below.  You can read the entire article by clicking the link above.

“…it raises a a number of issues with regard to all those who are seeking to vote in ways that express their Christian convictions. By saying that he might be “too Christian” for some, Huizenga’s comment also implied that committed Christians ought to support him. I’m sure that he is well aware of the many passionately committed Christians whose views on how best to deal with these issues, and many others, differ significantly from his. Huizenga is not “too Christian” for such folks. It is precisely their understanding of what it means to be deeply committed to the gospel, and how that commitment plays out in matters of public policy, that may motivate them to vote against him.

“That said, both in perception and in reality, Michigan’s Second Congressional District is a strongly “conservative Christian” district. To all of us who might fall into that category, I want to offer this challenge: Since when has the gospel been reducible to only one or two issues? How atrophied has our understanding of the gospel and Christian political engagement become, when simply passing a litmus test on abortion and/or same-sex marriage is all that passes for reflecting Christian commitment in the public square?

“No Christian, conservative or otherwise, should be a one- or two-issue voter. No Christian’s vote should ever be guaranteed on such a narrow basis, as if a preferred answer to issues (a) and (b) means giving a pass on issues (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g), even though they might be deeply contrary to the thrust of the gospel.

“Of course, voting as a Christian (and as a non-Christian, for that matter) is always going to require compromise. All politicians and all parties will uphold positions and legislate in ways that are incompatible with how we understand the gospel on a range of issues. From a Christian perspective, there is no “Christian Political Party,” and there are no ideal Christian candidates, because there are no ideal Christians this side of the coming kingdom.

“To vote well as a Christian is not simply to consider a couple of “trigger” issues, but to look for a platform that reflects the breadth of the priorities that we find in the scriptures as a whole, seen in the light of the gospel of Christ. Since the scriptures call us to seek the flourishing of all people, and the whole of creation, we should think as widely as this as we ponder how best to cast our votes.”

I agree with Suzanne 100%.

Fact: Most Political Violence Comes from the Right. It Must Be Confronted

In April 2009 the Department of Homeland Security issued a 9 page report entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.

The report summarized a number of government intelligence assessments and warned that a growing movement of “right wing extremist movements” posed the greatest threat of political violence and domestic terrorism in the United States.

As soon as the report was made public (which was not its original purpose), Republican Congressional leaders, together with a litany of conservative commentators, raised a hue and cry condemning the report, lambasting the DHS, and screaming for the heads of anyone — especially “liberals” or Democrats — who tried to engage in a serious discussion of the report’s findings.

Congressman John Boehner said the report was “offensive and unaccceptable.”  Fox News insisted that the DHS owed the entire country an apology.

Sadly,  none of  this was the least bit surprising coming from the conservative-Republican establishment which remains anti-science, anti-evidence, anti-logic, and anti-anything-that-calls-for critical self-assessment.

Of course, the DHS report was  immediately suppressed.  You probably have never heard of it.  As a result, the nation never had an open public conversation about the rising terrorist threat in this country, and why it was emanating from the right-wing.

It is impossible to have a productive conversation when one side can’t stop denying the facts, as Sarah Huckabee-Sanders continues to do almost every day.

Then in 2017 the Anti-Defamation League published another study, bulging with copious evidence and citations, stating similar conclusions.  A Dark & Constant Rage: 25 Years of Right-Wing Terrorism in the United States  opens by stating:

“Right-wing extremists have been one of the largest and most consistent sources of domestic terror incidents in the United States for many years, a fact that has not gotten the attention it deserves.”

Facts cannot be ignored.  They will eventually have their own way, whether we like it or not.

The rank cowardice displayed by the mainstream and the right-wing media guarantees that the public remains steeped in ignorance on this issue.  Daily we hear the mindless, false equivalencies and bogus comparisons.  Pundits insist that both sides are to blame; everyone needs to compromise; the right and the  left must meet somewhere in the middle.

The Republican party moves in a more and more extremist direction, yet anyone who points this out is accused of polarizing the debate.

What absolute rubbish!  It simply is not true.

The right-wing is to blame.  It is a fact, plain and simple.  No one benefits from a lie.

There is something about conservatism and its social, political rhetoric that, especially when taken to an extreme, becomes fertile soil for unstable people prone to violence.

We all — but especially God’s people — must be more concerned with the truth than we are with partisan defensiveness.  This means being open to correction.  Being willing to learn.  To admit when we have been wrong.

And most of all, we must be willing to change.

Tragically, evangelical Christianity persists in unapologetically identifying itself with a right-wing political movement that has blood on its hands.

Yes, that’s right.

Congressman Boehner, Fox News, and every other conservative spokesperson who helped to muzzled the DHS warning in 2009, who plugged their ears to the ADL report in 2017, who still refuses to admit the self-evident connection between Trump’s violent rhetoric — which has repeatedly embraced and advocated more violence — and the racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant terrorism dragging itself mercilessly across our country, all have blood on their hands.

God’s people cannot be a party to any of this.

B’Tselem Head Speaks to U.N., Condemned by Netanyahu

B’Tselem is the Hebrew work for “in the Image.”  It appears twice in Genesis 1:27, “So God created humanity in his own image, in the image of God he created humanity.”

B’Tselem  is also the name of an important Israel-based human rights organization (its full name is The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territory) that gives special attention to the inhuman treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories (i.e. the West Bank and Gaza).

B’Tselem is staffed by Israeli men and women of conscience who understand that all people are created as the Image of God.  Building upon this Biblical foundation, they also understand the dehumanization and systematic abuse inflicted upon the Palestinian people by Israel’s illegal military occupation.

As their website explains:

“B’Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories strives to end Israel’s occupation, recognizing that this is the only way to achieve a future that ensures human rights, democracy, liberty and equality to all people, Palestinian and Israeli alike…”

B’Tselem finds creative ways to inform the world about Israel’s egregious, daily crimes against humanity.  If you want to know the truth about Israel/ Palestinian relations, forget about Christian news outlets.  Turn off the corporate news media.  They only repeat the acceptable lies, misrepresentations and puerile mutterings of Israel’s Zionist propaganda.

Instead, as a first step towards learning the truth, read the regular updates available from B’Tselem.  Subscribe to their newsletter.  Order a few of their many publications.  Watch the numerous videos on their Youtube channel.

Discover the truth for yourself.

Hagai el-Ad is the current head of B’Tselem.  He recently spoke to the

Hagai El-Ad, Executive Director of Israeli NGO B’Tselem.
AFP / JACK GUEZ (Photo credit should read JACK GUEZ/AFP/Getty Images)

United Nations about Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people and was instantly condemned by Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister.

You can watch Amy Goodman’s two-part interview with Mr. el-Ad here and here.

Mr. al-Ad and his coworkers are a shining ray of light, truth and humanity in an otherwise very dark, oppressive land known as Israel.